| April 26, 2007 Globalization: Some Get It and Some Don't by Katy Parrish, insurgent49 According to Thomas Barnett, the ones who don’t get globalization it “lack the democracy gene …and very soon everyone will be forced to accept it.” He further explains that “you can’t add three billion more capitalists and call this whole thing off.” Sponsored by Conoco Phillips and BP, while presenting at UAA recently, Mr. Barnett bragged about his weekly briefings with the Pentagon and how he has designed a new map for the Pentagon. After fifteen years in the defense business, he now tours the country pushing his books, his new company Enterra Solutions, and fast-talking his way into every Republican’s heart in the audience. Thank goddess that several friends were with me that night. His first book justified redefining the military into two major forces. The Leviathan force or “Regime Changer” would shock and awe a country with coveted resources and the Sys Admin force would clean up after to make the country lucrative for investors. The Sys Admin force will be more privately funded and would serve extended tours. The countries being targeted are referred to as the “non-integrating gap” and included Africa, and the Middle East stretching to Indo-China. After getting over my initial nausea, I became fascinated with his inability to make eye contact with anyone in the audience while he delivered his poison. With no shame, he fully admits that the invasion of Iraq was about oil and explained the reason we are failing there is because we only have “six boots on the ground per 1,000 civilians”. To be truly effective, the System Admin force really needed to be “twenty-five boots on the ground per 1,000 civilians” to secure the country. (Remember, he briefs the Pentagon weekly.) Note he used the word “boots”, rather than soldiers. Dehumanizing murder for profit seemed to make it more palatable while he flashed his power point with CSI sound effects. His main theory as to why there is a movement against globalization goes something like this: In the old economic models, males had more power than females. In a global economy females are more equal (note that he uses “more equal”, what does that mean?). He adds that terrorists like their women knowing where their place is. So, in his mind’s eye, people who do not support globalization are terrorists. He maintains that the only mistake we made in the war on terrorism is the establishment of the Department Homeland Security. He is certain we cannot defend our borders; therefore we must extend our borders. He considers peace as the ultimate aftermarket. His company, Enterra Solutions designs IT products and offers resiliency rules to turn these less developed countries in the gap into low cost countries for foreign direct investment. Low cost companies are much more appealing to multinational corporations. About halfway through his power point presentation, he brings up a pic of his family. He points at his adoptive daughter from China and states, “I thought she would be my sixth deduction.” He goes on to say that we need to recruit from China so we can become the next superpower. He also considers China our biggest threat. So…we need to buy them at the highest price now before they decide to take us over. You would think the fact that China owns over forty percent of our treasury bonds would be a high enough price. For me, the ultimate irony was realizing that what ThomasBarnett proclaims to be a new map is, in fact, what the John Birch Society has been warning us about for over twenty-five years. I was one of the hand-picked students from Monroe High School, in Fairbanks, who got to attend a luncheon sponsored by the John Birch Society at the Gold Room in May of 1980. That day, I learned about communism and globalization, and realized that the majority in the room were all about US patriotism and protection of our Constitution. I thought they were a little off center, but now I know they had a fuller grasp of globalization than I did. How can we sit back and watch a defense salesman pitch murder for profit? My question was a follow up to Barnett admitting that the US education system as the Achilles Heel of this country. I pointed out the President’s proposals for funding education at a mere 2% and DOD at 20% and asked, “How are we going to make education a priority in this country?” He stated, “We just need to privatize education.” I lost it. I proclaimed, “That is exactly what the No Child Left Behind is doing.” I asked for clarification especially for those who experience Autism, ADHD and other neurological impairments on how they would access this private education. He shouted, finally looking me in the eye, “You’ve scored your emotional point for the night. Congrats!” I thanked him and proceeded to ask, “What are your speaker fees?” He walked away averting his gaze with no answer. An angry woman shouted at me, “What are your fees?” while her husband shushed her. I proudly exclaimed, “I speak for free.” He took one more question and then closed. I could barely wait for the applause to die down before I bolted towards the door. I didn’t even say goodbye to my friends. I had to get out of there before I started screaming. Walking to my car, a young man came up behind me and asked, “Can you finish your point you were trying to make before you were so rudely interrupted?” I was intrigued. I offered my hand and told him my first name and proceeded to share the evils of the No Child Left Behind Act, including the easy access of contact information of high school students by military recruiters. He then disclosed he was in the military and in fact had a “Doctorate in Rhetoric.” I started giggling and exclaimed, “Oh, you’re military intelligence!” He said, “Yes, but I am just a pee-on.” I wished him many learning opportunities and directed him not to forget about the voices of the marginalized. I walked away and thought …why did he disclose? I don’t know. All I know is that I wasn’t afraid to ask a hard question to a rich, egotistical, military strategist and be honest with a green, military intelligence officer. Whether my efforts make a difference is really up to the readers of this story. How are you going to respond knowing that the powers at be are relying on our passive acceptance of this blood thirsty mission for profit? You can listen to Mr. Barnett’s abbreviated speech by going here: www.poptech.org/popcasts/PopCasts.aspx?viewcastid=12 Make sure your stomach is empty. Katy Parrish is a freelance writer and media activist who can be reached at takebackthemedia@hotmail.com. |
-
Columnists -
- also by this
writer -
Special Ed Children Left Behind Breaking the Cycle Interview With An Anarchist Patriot Act Redux The Beat Goes On Black Friday at the Mall of America Out Of Sight, Out Of Mind Dirty Little Secret Sticks And Stones Favorite Son Good News, Bad News Teach Your Parents Well Unpatriotic Act The Revolution Will Be Televised The GOP's PBS Pied Piper Plays Poisonous Music Crashing The Party Become The Media |
||||||||
| Copyright
2005-2007
Insurgent Media. All Rights
Reserved. in-sur-gent (in sur'jent), n. 1. a member of a group which revolts against the policies of its leadership. |
|||||||||
